What motivated you to choose the Social Policy (Evidence Synthesis) MSc?
Coming from international economics, I had a strong sense of how global economic systems are supposed to work but much less understanding of why they so often fail the most vulnerable. In my work, I kept coming up against the same ‘wicked’ issues – poverty, exclusion, unequal access to healthcare and education, and climate change – without feeling I had the right conceptual tools to respond in a genuinely people-centred way. This MSc stood out to me because it combined rigorous social policy and research training with evidence synthesis, which felt like a meaningful way to conduct applied research drawing on what the wider body of evidence was really saying.
What did you find most helpful about the course? And what was most challenging?
What I found most helpful about the programme was that it gave me a new way of thinking about complex social problems. It showed me that social interventions resist simple solutions not just because they are technically difficult but because they are also culturally, socially and politically contested. I especially valued learning how evidence synthesis can bring together different forms of knowledge to inform better policy and practice. At the same time, one of the biggest challenges was wrestling with whose knowledge counts, how it is weighted and whose voices ultimately shape decision-making. That made the course both stretching and deeply rewarding for me.
What was the topic and method used for your dissertation and what was the dissertation experience like?
My dissertation explored how young people in low- and middle-income countries experienced infectious disease outbreaks, particularly COVID-19, in relation to their livelihoods and everyday lives. I chose a systematic review of qualitative studies because pre-existing research tended to capture only parts of the picture, and I wanted to understand the issue more fully across different contexts. Working on this in 2021, while the effects of the pandemic were still unfolding, made the topic feel especially immediate. It also reinforced for me how often the experiences of young people in resource-poor settings are missing from mainstream policy discussions.
What have you been doing since completing your MSc, and how has your MSc informed this?
Since graduating, I’ve been working as a campaigner with a global network of humanitarian and development agencies, focusing on the global debt crisis. The MSc has been hugely valuable in that work because it strengthened my ability to interrogate and synthesise existing research – something that really matters in a sector where resources are limited and primary research is not always possible. Working at the intersection of evidence and policy advocacy has also deepened my interest in whose knowledge is recognised or sidelined in development finance decision-making. In many ways, that question is what brought me back to the UCL Social Research Institute (SRI), where I am now pursuing a doctorate.
What advice would you give to future MSc students considering taking the Social Policy (Evidence Synthesis) MSc?
My advice would be to come with a question or problem you genuinely care about, not just a topic that sounds interesting on paper. For me, this programme is most rewarding when you are driven by an issue that really matters to you, because the methods become far more meaningful when they are tied to a clear purpose. One of the most valuable lessons I took from it is that evidence synthesis is not simply a technical exercise – it can also be a way of opening up whose knowledge ultimately counts. I’d also really encourage students to make the most of the SRI’s interdisciplinary environment, which is one of its many strengths.